Jump to content

The Trump Administration 2017-


Ms. Spam
 Share

Recommended Posts

Violence, destruction, revealing personal information to destroy someone's life, are the current tools being used, and nobody has the right to use them.

Having the right has nothing to do with it. All that matters is whether or not someone (or some mob) has the power to do so. It's been like that throughout history.

 

A coworker got on a kick saying that she thought that by now we'd have eliminated all wars. I can't believe that people can be that naive.

 

As long as there is a wealth disparity there will be social unrest and war. People think that terrorism is all about religion, but in reality it's about have nots lashing out at those they think have more than what they do. Race relations are the same way. Blacks lash out because they think they're getting screwed, and rednecks do the same thing. Trying to argue whether who's right or wrong is ultimately pointless, because in the big picture there will always be people who think they're not being treated fairly and in time they will lash out over it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

Violence, destruction, revealing personal information to destroy someone's life, are the current tools being used, and nobody has the right to use them.

Having the right has nothing to do with it. All that matters is whether or not someone (or some mob) has the power to do so. It's been like that throughout history.

 

A coworker got on a kick saying that she thought that by now we'd have eliminated all wars. I can't believe that people can be that naive.

 

As long as there is a wealth disparity there will be social unrest and war. People think that terrorism is all about religion, but in reality it's about have nots lashing out at those they think have more than what they do. Race relations are the same way. Blacks lash out because they think they're getting screwed, and rednecks do the same thing. Trying to argue whether who's right or wrong is ultimately pointless, because in the big picture there will always be people who think they're not being treated fairly and in time they will lash out over it.

There was a time when I would've completely agreed with you, but the more I see of the world, the more I think that people just hate because it's easier. Even looking at something like Nightly, it's a lot easier to say someone's an idiot and ignore them, or flame them, than it is to consider what they're saying and weigh it appropriately. And we've all been posting her for a long time, share similar interests, and in general have a pretty tight knit community. When you extend that out to people who have completely alien ideas and you actually have to look for common ground? It's not surprising that we haven't eliminated war, it's surprising we have eliminated ourselves.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

There was a time when I would've completely agreed with you, but the more I see of the world, the more I think that people just hate because it's easier. Even looking at something like Nightly, it's a lot easier to say someone's an idiot and ignore them, or flame them, than it is to consider what they're saying and weigh it appropriately.

I wonder if you were thinking about the PM below you once sent me when you posted that.

 

 

Dude, you are, beyond a doubt, the whiniest little bitch I have ever encountered. Your constant need for attention rivals both of my children combined.

 

It's people like you who make this world ****.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I was thinking about how I've reacted to you. And it stands to my point. I have no clue how your wealth relates to mine, and it doesn't mean anything to me.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What pisses me off about the whole statue thing is that the people understood it at the time they were erected. They understood reparations and forgiveness. There was a reason for the Pledge of Allegiance after the Civil War. It was all about uniting the people behind the idea of freedom of thought and the equal application of law for everyone, being able to show respect for someone you disagreed with, and accept that they have the same rights you do. Now, we have to disqualify someone from history if they are not perfect, and in line with your ideology. We used to say the pledge right along side them. Nobody is perfect. Soon there will be no history, nor any ability to forgive weakness or difference. Look at the leaders we have now (from any side in any country), there is ample weakness to go around. Find the ability to forgive.

 

You are never going to get the cooperation of the other side if you start labeling them all as racists and disqualifying them from the discussion. I've said it before, you can't shame an extremist into moderating (unless skillfully, and carefully, applied. On the collective, not the individual. Over the long term.). You can push more people to extremism, or push the extremists to rash action. That's why these violent counter-protests annoy me. Nothing gets them more excited than a legitimate enemy. They have been attacked exercising their constitutional rights, what could excite these people more?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

...They understood reparations and forgiveness. There was a reason for the Pledge of Allegiance after the Civil War. It was all about uniting the people behind the idea of freedom of thought and the equal application of law for everyone, being able to show respect for someone you disagreed with, and accept that they have the same rights you do.

You're kidding, right? I mean, you don't really think everyone was ready to forgive and forget immediately after the Civil War, do you? Or that the Pledge of Allegiance, which was first written in the 1890s, I think, and modified multiple times until the 1950s, was a product of the Civil War, do you?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Never said everyone was ready to forgive and forget right after the war, clearly they still aren't. Been a slow healing process since the end of the war. Those statues that are being torn down were part of the healing process. If the Union side would have acted then like the left is acting now we would still be fighting the insurgency that would have resulted.

 

I will admit that the primary purpose for the Pledge of Allegiance was the indoctrination of immigrants, but Bellamy himself attributed the the Civil War as a large motivation for having a pledge, and for the specific phrasing of it (which is bloody obvious). The pledge was written only 27 years after the war ended and early in the healing process. It's not like he didn't live through the war and it didn't affect him.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Can any of you come up with one thing about the Trump Presidency that you like? I try to look at every individual as a flawed person that deserves ridicule for their faults (to help them learn to be more like me), and praise for their strengths (as I see them). Can you see both sides of the individual?

 

I ****ing hate Trump, but when he does something good I give good feedback. All he gets is blind negative feedback most times. He gets attacked for bullshit when there are perfectly good things to attack. Maybe Trump really is dumb as a dog. How do you train a dog? Not by beating it continuously no matter what it does...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

First, those statues weren't part of any "healing" process, they were to remind everyone that even if slavery was over, Jim Crow was still in effect.

 

Second, Trump's not a dog. He's a 71-year-old man, and he's made it clear he doesn't want to change anything about himself. He's demonstrated his ignorance in every field that the President has to deal with, and refuses to listen to anyone who actually knows more than he does, even if he placed them in his staff or Cabinet. He doesn't deserve any praise for anything, because he hasn't done anything except piss everyone off.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I have seen him listen to people on many occasions. He just changed his track on Afghanistan because he listened. He just doesn't advertise very often that he listens because of the big ass ego. He did on the Afghanistan deal though. He admitted that he had learned something from the people (like Mattis) that he put in place. Give credit.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Big day. Arpaio pardon AND the transgender ban is a real thing and not just a tweet.

Call it payback for Manning's commutation I suppose. Should have been put against a wall and shot, but instead got off of what was already a ridiculously light sentence. Of all of Obama's actions, that one perhaps infuriated me the most. Tough to say which one was worse, enabling traitors or rogue officials.

 

I'm all for eliminating the pardon completely. It's been used all too frequently for political purposes. I get that there are legit recipients, but it does the justice system harm to give out get out of jail free cards for naked political expediency. Scandalous pardons have become quite bipartisan.

 

As for the transgender ban, that should be a non-controversial call. It really says something about how reflexive sexual identity politics have become that it was ever considered what with the myriad of disqualifications for issues that would be much less obviously disruptive to the military's mission. But thoughtfulness is not allowed when anything to do with transgendered people are brought up today.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

 

Big day. Arpaio pardon AND the transgender ban is a real thing and not just a tweet.

Call it payback for Manning's commutation I suppose. Should have been put against a wall and shot, but instead got off of what was already a ridiculously light sentence. Of all of Obama's actions, that one perhaps infuriated me the most. Tough to say which one was worse, enabling traitors or rogue officials.

 

I'm all for eliminating the pardon completely. It's been used all too frequently for political purposes. I get that there are legit recipients, but it does the justice system harm to give out get out of jail free cards for naked political expediency. Scandalous pardons have become quite bipartisan.

 

As for the transgender ban, that should be a non-controversial call. It really says something about how reflexive sexual identity politics have become that it was ever considered what with the myriad of disqualifications for issues that would be much less obviously disruptive to the military's mission. But thoughtfulness is not allowed when anything to do with transgendered people are brought up today.

Arpaio was a bad call, and do was Manning. I really believe that Manning was primarily due to the transgender issue and a "screw you" to Trump. Probably wouldn't have happened if Clinton had won. Arpaio bugs me more because so many Trump supporters that I know have been yelling about the Constitution, and Trump immediately turned around and pardoned someone who was in trouble for specifically violating the Constitution. And they're cheering it. At least the left is consistent on reinterpretating the Constitution to fit their agenda and doesn't pay lip service to being otherwise.

 

Again, small subset, not all conservatives, etc. Just talking about people I know.

 

I think that there could be reasons for the pardon, but you're right. At this point I would rather see it as a power of Congress. Then it would be exceptionally rare.

 

As for the transgender ban, I think that it was just too late. They are already openly serving, and sometimes you just have to accept that your side lost. Saying that Tricare won't provide any medical services related to gender reassignment would have been my preferred choice, if he was going to do anything. I just don't see it as a truly important fight, and there are more important battles for social conservatives to fight.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

 

As for the transgender ban, I think that it was just too late. They are already openly serving, and sometimes you just have to accept that your side lost. Saying that Tricare won't provide any medical services related to gender reassignment would have been my preferred choice, if he was going to do anything. I just don't see it as a truly important fight, and there are more important battles for social conservatives to fight.

 

That's falling into a ratchet argument. Once a liberal policy in imposed, no matter how goofy or easy to reverse, we're supposed to retreat to the next hill that will be overrun by a fiat of one type or another in a few years. Less than that given how quickly things are going from being called a slippery slope fallacy to demands that it be done NOW or Silicon Valley and the NBA will wreck your economy. Wash, rinse, then we get someone like Trump because half the country feels helpless to stop anything.

 

I mean, give up on this? A brand new legacy building policy in the dying days of the Obama Administration that hadn't even been fully implemented yet and could be stopped by a simple order from the president was something that should have just been let happen? It's not even a fight, it's over. Barring Congress overriding a veto, it can't be changed for the next 3 years.

 

I'd hope that the fever would break on the whole thing by then, but I'm not holding my breath.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I view the whole thing as a battle lost long before Obama made that change.

 

I had a really long post written about why, but I realized that it would start a bigger fight than I have any interest in fighting. Not with you, Poe, but with the people who are more socially liberal and non-Catholic. Driver has described himself as being socially liberal and fiscally conservative, and safe to say I'm the exact opposite of that.

 

If you are familiar with Humanae Vitae by Pope Paul VI, that's the starting point of where I think we lost this fight. Christians, who make up the bulk of social conservatives in the US, have already been acting for decades as if there's no real important difference between men and women and that the human body is wrong. So we lost the battle back before anyone ever heard the name Obama or the name Donald Trump.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This thread has covered so many topics since I last checked that it feels impossible to jump in on any of them.

 

If news-making was a metric for measuring a presidency, then I guess you really could say (with a straight face) that Trump has done more at this point of his term than any other president.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 Share

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use.